The Handmaid's Tale

Rating:
Summary: Not enough Dunaway; needs a rewrite
Review: The book was great! This movie, well, it's ok, but nothing compared to the book. What is the weakest about it is that Faye Dunaway didn't have a bigger role. I went to see it only for her, and she was hardly in it. Also, it is not believable that Robert Duvall would prefer Natasha Richardson to Dunaway and make a play for her. Totally unrealistic. Dunaway is much better looking and all woman. The script should have been redone. Ditch the Richardson character all together, have Serena Joy (Dunaway) go into a fertility clinic and rely on her prayers and medical treatment to have a baby. There could be some great fire and brimstone monologues from Dunaway also as she preaches to her clan while struggling with infertility. End up with Dunaway finally being able to have a baby, and then, when she becomes a mother, she realizes the fascist world they live in, then she could try to escape with the young tot a la "Not Without My Daughter." Toss in a couple of topless scenes and we've got a full-blown Dunaway hit! It would have been riveting!

Rating:
Summary: a decent film of a better book
Review: the environment--these are the facets of a bleak existence and the movie holds true to that. There are flashes of joy, mostly in the well-played interaction of the main character and her best friend, but these are few and far-between. This isn't a complaint, but fair warning.
A worse flaw, for me, were the changes made to the main character, who moves from a more honest passive character in the novel to an active, at times brave/heroic character in the film. Perhaps they thought it would have been too dark, perhaps they thought the audience wouldn't react well to a passive main character. But it robs the story of much of its truth. As does the ending, which without giving any details, is much less ambiguous than in the story.
If you've read the book it's worth seeing but be prepared for some disappointment. If you haven't read it, it's even more worth seeing, especially today when aspects of our lives like the Taliban and the Patriot Act make the story reverberate more, but don't expect to have a bunch of friends over for a laugh-fest.

Rating:
Summary: a decent film of a better book
Review: the environment--these are the facets of a bleak existence and the movie holds true to that. There are flashes of joy, mostly in the well-played interaction of the main character and her best friend, but these are few and far-between. This isn't a complaint, but fair warning.
A worse flaw, for me, were the changes made to the main character, who moves from a more honest passive character in the novel to an active, at times brave/heroic character in the film. Perhaps they thought it would have been too dark, perhaps they thought the audience wouldn't react well to a passive main character. But it robs the story of much of its truth. As does the ending, which without giving any details, is much less ambiguous than in the story.
If you've read the book it's worth seeing but be prepared for some disappointment. If you haven't read it, it's even more worth seeing, especially today when aspects of our lives like the Taliban and the Patriot Act make the story reverberate more, but don't expect to have a bunch of friends over for a laugh-fest.

Rating:
Summary: Extremely scary, but worth watching
Review: The first time I watched The Handmaid's Tale I was hooked! Like Huxley's Brave New World, it is a scary vision of a possible future in which birth is regulated by the government. Unlike Huxley, however, The Handmaid's Tale is also a vision of something far worse--what happens when religion is twisted around and used as a means to force people to do something they don't wish to do, especially if said religion controls the State. Whether it's Christianity or New Age, or any other religion for that matter, a religion-controlled State can be a very bad thing.

The actors in The Handmaid's Tale are a very good bunch. Natasha Richardson as Kate/Offred turned in a stunning performance, as did Faye Dunaway and Robert Duvall as Serena Joy and the Commander. Aidan Quinn was excellent as Nick, and I loved Elizabeth McGovern's scheming, wily Moira. Victoria Tennant gave me the chills in her role of Aunt Lydia, and the role of Ofglen, though small, was wonderfully handled by Blanche Baker.

All in all, The Handmaid's Tale is a good movie. My only gripe with the DVD is that it didn't have any extras apart from the trailer, but the film itself is definitely worth watching.

Rating:
Summary: Then read the book!
Review: The movie is good, but I always felt like there must be more. There is. Watch this movie, THEN READ THE BOOK! I hope this movie has peaked the curiosity of others to read the book, as it is truly scary - especially when you notice a lot of things that were futuristic in the book that are reality today.

Rating:
Summary: Not as good as the book
Review: There are a fair few differences between the book and the film. And if you're studying the book for A level english lit, the film will cause confusion! Read the book, it's much better.

Rating:
Summary: Liberal Garbage
Review: This film and the book that inspired it are a pessimistic vision of what our world would be if we let the wrong people and wrong systems have their way. Its premise is not completely unrealistic, I must admit, and we only need to look at the Taliban and its treatment of women to know this.

Still, I felt during the entire movie as if I were being preached to by an anarchist disguised as a filmmaker/artist. The film's far-left-wing indoctrination, or far-right, depending on how you view it, was not for me. If the political spectrum is indeed a circle, with both of our main political parties seated toward the top of that circle, this is a story brought to us by someone at the bottom of that circle. Right next to the Libertarians.

As someone who puts at least a moderate amount of faith in our economy, policital parties and our government in general, I recommend you do anything else besides watch this piece of paranoid propaganda. It was a waste of my time.

Rating:
Summary: A big let down, an average american movie flop.
Review: This film is a let down in one way and one way alone. It has been 'americanised'. Margaret Atwood wrote a fantastic monologue focussing on the struggles of an american woman, same as many others, who is trapped in a dystopic society (or should we say, an even more dystopic one) than the one that she grew up in. Her life is in tatters, husband dead, daughter no longer recollecting her as her mother, she is in a rut. What does she do? She resists, she lives on through her memory, she remains as seperated from Gilead as she possibly can. She does what we all can if we try, we do the human thing, we resist POWER HUNGRY WESTERN WORLD LEADERS, we live on despite ATTACKS MADE ON US, we see through the PROPAGANDA fed to us, slightly sweetened and on a spoon. She does the decent thing.

What happens in the movie? Low and behold, our heroine physically resists when she aids Moira in her escape plan, and even more so when she assassinates the man who ended the beloved constitution. The, uh, huhum 'Gude Amairicaine thang ta doo'.
I can understand why americans may be offended that Offred did not rebel against her captivity as outwardly as she could have done, but that was the point Atwood was making. Offred did not do the american thing, she did the human thing. Get over it, I mean , Hollywood did not have to spew out this gawdy mess so that the ending of a great literary work looks more favorably towards your way of thinking. My condolances go to the great Canadian author, WHOSE MASTERPIECE HAS BEEN STAINED BY THE NEED TO ALTER CERTAIN POINTS TO AGREE WITH WESTERN THEOCRACY.

I only hope that we aren't faced with 'Handmaids in Arms 2: Offred versus Al Quaeda'.

Here endeth the lecture.

Rating:
Summary: A Taliban-like Christian theocracy in the US
Review: This is a haunting, psychologically compelling story about what the United States might be like under a right wing, fundamentalist theocracy. Adapted by the acclaimed playwright Harold Pinter from the novel by Margaret Atwood, this is a tale of the suppression of women by a totalitarian state called the "Republic of Gilead." In some respects one is reminded of Orwell's 1984: the endless war from without, designed to keep the populace preoccupied and beholden to the state; the paucity of basic food stuffs and consumer goods expect for the ruling class, the general hopelessness, etc. There is horrendous pollution so that most women are not fertile, yet the state needs babies for the war effort and the economy. Consequently women's bodies are taken over by the state, and those women that are fertile are made to bear children for the sterile leaders. Those who are not fertile are reduced to servitude. All overt sexual expression and any kind of activity not in keeping with the strict dictates of the fundamentalist religion is forbidden, and transgressions are punishable by death, sometimes in public hangings. In one ugly scene the handmaids themselves are made to pull the rope that attaches to the noose that strangles a wayward handmaid. This is followed by a man accused of rape being thrown to the handmaids, who literally rip him apart with their bare hands.

Natasha Richardson has the starring role as a fertile handmaid for the Commander (Robert Duvall). She is not artificially inseminated (presumably since that would be against the dictates of the religion, which is, by the way, a kind of repressive fundamentalist Christianity), instead there is a "ceremony" in which the Commander's wife (Faye Dunaway) holds her hands (as they both wear veils) while the Commander with his clothes still on--Well, one can imagine.

I read the novel some years ago and was struck not by Atwood's attack on fundamentalist Christianity as much as I was by her attack on men, period. Harold Pinter's screenplay and Volker Schlondorff's direction emphasize the hypocrisy, willful ignorance and anti-human aspects of fundamentalism while attributing the sexism to the patriarchal religion. What is stunningly topical (viewing this in the year of Our Lord 2002) is the parallel between the repressive fundamentalist theocracy of Atwood's vision and that of the Taliban. The subjugation of women, using them strictly as servants or as reproductive machines, their bodies covered and their heads veiled (in bright red), is a striking bit of dead-on foresight by Atwood, Pinter and Schlondorff. This movie was perhaps made a decade ahead of its time.

Richardson is very good in her characteristic way. She has a quality unlike most movie stars in that she projects primarily not her looks or charisma or even her vitality, but instead her individual will, a quality that is exactly right for the part. Faye Dunaway as the commander's wife acts out (in contrasting blue) a kind of Daughters of the American Revolution club woman mentality to a tee. Duvall is wonderfully slimy as a warlord hypocrite always claiming to act in the name of God. (Seems familiar.) Elizabeth McGovern is believable as a sexy lesbian handmaid (a "gender criminal") while Victoria Tennant ("Aunt Lydia") is a kind of drill sergeant housemother to the handmaids. Aidan Quinn gets to be Richardson's heroic lover.

This may not be entirely faithful to the book, but it is a fine work in its own right. The direction is intelligent and focused and the script by Pinter excellent. The acting is superior all around and the story is true psychologically. This movie is also a warning that it could happen here.

Rating:
Summary: Very close to the book, unusual for a literary movie
Review: This is a wonderful rendition of Atwood's Handmaid's Tale, and stays fairly close to the book's details which is very refreshing for a literary movie. The more important aspects of the book are explained for the novice; any unexplained terms are quickly glossed over. As for not explaining what the war is over, as one review mentioned, even Atwood was fairly coy and mum about that, so one can hardly blame the movie. The characters are convincing and play the parts Atwood laid out for them. Until I saw the changed ending (which is not too bad, IMO) I had begun to wonder if Atwood herself had collaborated with the effort, but apparently not. :)

Bottom line, if you like Atwood's Tale, you should check this out.